Sigma USA announces $899 price for 35mm F1.4 DG HSM prime lens

Sigma USA has announced the price and availability details of the 35mm F1.4 DG HSM it unveiled at Photokina 2012. The 35mm F1.4, which will be available for Nikon, Canon, Sony, Pentax and Sigma DSLRs, is compatible with both full-frame and APS-C cameras. It will have an estimated street price of $899, making it significantly less expensive than the big-brand competition. Sigma UK, meanwhile, has announced an SRP of £799.99. The lens is the first of Sigma's 'Global Vision' lineup, representing the 'Art' category of enthusiast-grade lenses.

The 35mm F1.4 DG HSM, is designed for photographers who want to achieve creative, dramatic effects in their photographs. As the first lens released under Sigma’s new Art line, it will feature a new matte finish and overall new design concept, which includes a clearly defined category label on every new lens. This 35mm wide-angle lens with a maximum aperture of 1.4 ensures outstanding performance in low light, and a stunning bokeh background effect to emphasize the subject.

“We’re thrilled to break into this category of lenses with a product from our new Global Vision,” said Mark Amir-Hamzeh, president of Sigma Corporation of America. “We’re confident that our A1 quality control system, coupled with the industry’s first USB dock, will differentiate our lens in the category. Since it’s so versatile – ideal for scenes including landscapes, portraits, close-ups and studio photography – we think that it will be a hit.”

Other features of the new 35mm F1.4 DG HSM include:

One “F” Low Dispersion (FLD) glass lens and four Special Low Dispersion (SLD) glass lenses to ensure exceptional correction of lateral and axial chromatic aberration, the latter of which cannot be corrected in post production

A floating inner focus system to provide extremely high optical performance for close-up photos

Super Multi-Layer Coating to reduce flare and ghosting and provide sharp and high contrast images even in backlit conditions

A HSM (Hyper Sonic Motor) that ensures high speed, accurate and quiet AF

Rubber incorporated into the attachment part of the lens hood, and an improved redesign of the lens cap and AF / MF changeover switch have been improved

Thermally Stable Composite (TSC), which has high affinity to metal parts, that are housed internally, increases overall functionality, lifespan, and quality of the lens

A rounded 9 blade diaphragm creates an attractive blur to the out-of-focus areas of the image

A newly developed USB dock, which will be sold separately and exclusively for new product lines, can be paired with new Sigma Optimization Pro software to update the lens firmware and adjust parameters, such as micro focus adjustment

All of Sigma's manufacturing – right down to molds and parts – is carried out under an integrated production system, based entirely in Japan. Sigma is now one of the very few manufacturers whose products are solely made in Japan. Every 35mm F1.4 DG HSM will be checked using Sigma’s own MTF measuring system, “A1,” as will all new lenses under the Global vision categories. This system uses 46-megapixel Foveon direct image sensors to pick up previously undetectable high-frequency details for quality control inspections.

The Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM will be available in Sigma, Sony (D), Nikon (D), Pentax and Canon mounts.

Comments

The Sigma 35mm is sharp at all apertures. I purchased the Sigma to use with my D800E because I love the 35mm prime focal length. However, I wasn't willing to pay the tariff for the Nikon 35mm 1.4 especially since its reviews were so-so at best (it's softer than the Canon wide open but sharper than Canon by f/5.6). Given the Sigma's bargain price and its good reviews, I purchased a copy. I have not been disappointed.After using it for quite a time now I wrote my own review here : http://pixelarge.com/sigma-35mm-f1-4-dg-hsm-lens-review/

There now needs to be information from Sigma and Canon as well as Sony as to whether they are using regular or lead-free solders. Nikon admits it does and marks new equipment with an arrowed 10 logo to indicate a lifespan of around a decade before the circuits become both unusable and irrepairable.

Is the Sony A99 time-limited and the Mark II and III 5D Canons and the 1Ds series including the new 1Dx?

I believe prospective purchasers are entitled to know, as they can last less than a decade due to the solder sprouting "Tin Whiskers" (NASA)

Comparing the MTF charts. Assuming the same LP/MM (not specified on sigma chart) The sigma seems to have more contrast (aka sharpness) on the center and keeps up with nikon on the edge. Bokeh looks to have the same characteristic but we will have to wait for side by side image samples.

If the construction and focus is nailed, we might have a winner lens. Better than the Nikon but half the price. I owned both nikon and canon 35mm. The canon L is quite good and very small compared to both of these lenses. I would expect the sigma to do quite well vs the Canon L. We have to wait and see if the color is good and if the quality is consistent. USB dock seems to be a great way to calibrate lens without having to send it back in. Canon and Nikon...time to think about a refresh.

Sorry, but what's the big issue in the conversion from US$ 899 to UK£ 799???also by adding a big 25% of taxes it would not cost much more than UK£ 705 or EUR 885 in the worst case...Why the hell are still there those differences??? :(

Also: U.S. prices are stated without sales tax, while European consumer prices include the "value added tax". And VAT rates in European countries are oftentimes large compared to the typical U.S. sales tax.

Sigma has proved before that they have the ability to outdo Nikon with some of their prime lenses. The 50mm f/1.4 being a good example. I have no doubt that this lens will at least be equal with the Nikon version. Sigma is stepping up to become a major player in the lens market.

Of course this Sigma lens has a polycarbonate body as opposed to a magnesium one like the Nikon, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Lighter weight and lower price. Most people don't seem to mind that most entry to mid-level cameras are made out of polycarbonate. The stuff is strong.

This will be my next lens purchase. I hope they come out with a 24mm f/1.4 soon.

$299? If Nikon can give us a 35mm F1.8 crop lens that almost covers a full-frame sensor for $199 (and it does cover the entire full-frame sensor at close distances), I see no reason why a full-frame version shouldn't cost only a little more. But of course they would never do that because they don't want to hurt the sales of their expensive lenses.

So does this mean that it will drive down the prices of the "big three" 35mm 1.4 lenses from Canon, Nikon and Sony? I was planning to buy the 35L today but this news came in. I wouldn't really justify the high cost of 35L, or other OEM 35mm 1.4 lenses for that matter, if this particular lens would perform even just marginally better in terms of sharpness and control of CA (regardless of whether the QC is still crapola or not). So what will be the difference considering the cheaper price?

Compare the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 to the Canon and Nikon versions. I've heard it's quite close to the Nikon but still a bit behind overall. It's not uncommon to pay a lot for that last bit of performance. If history repeats itself, this Sigma, even if it's very good, won't affect any other manufacturer's prices in the least.

I have the canon mount version and have compared it to the 85L. Yes the L wins by a hair's breadth but i'm guessing 99.9% of people won't be able to tell.

But you're right that the Original manufacturer prices probably won't drop much, although probably not for the reasons you've stated. More like there will always be people who will *ONLY* buy Canon-Nikon-Sony and will pay premium prices for that privilege; empirical evidence be damned.

Lots of R&D, lots of tight tolerance components, lots of tooling and fixturing for assembly and testing, a very involved assembly process, a number of middle men, and the kicker, fairly low volumes (for a consumer product).

Yes, Eyefuse...didn't you know that you should read all 300 comments before offering your thoughts...sheesh.Come on...give Henry his little victories...it makes some people feel good to belittle others.

I get flack when I question if an expensive item is made in Japan. Now, even Sigma is eager to reassure you it is. There's nothing wrong with China or Thailand but at these prices you're paying for Japan. Not a fan of Sigma but it does look like the are trying to improve the QC.

Japan and Germany are the only two countries capable of manufacturing high quality optics. Some photo products might be made in China or Thailand, but the lens elements were almost certainly manufactured in Japan.

Comparing an f/2 small prime vs a large f/1.4 prime? That's an odd comparison. Compare this against the Nikon 35mm f/1.4 G or Canon EF 35mm f/1.4 L because those are its competitors. The point of these larger lenses is the large 1.4 aperture. If you don't need it and are fine with f/2 than these lenses were never a consideration for you anyway.

This Sigma has a usb dock with which you can customise the lens to level to which none other lens on market can be done. Also the weight of this lens is from that extra stop on aperture which means a lot glass to move.

But f/1.4 makes a big difference in portrature with a FF camera. I agree Caon 35/2.0 IS USM is a better choice as a walk-around street photography lens. Glad Sigma provides a much affordable alternative.

You really need couple of lessons in physics and mathematics before you can even comprehend why is there a size difference.Now shut of your computer and start looking for some classes so you don't embarrass your self as often in future.

As a 35L owner, this just looks like "more of the same" but with a lower price. That is, it looks about as big and heavy as the 35L. I'm way more tempted by the 35/2 IS for the reduced size and weight. Handling my camera with the 35L on it is not that much different than with the 24-70L. I loved the handling with my old 35/2, but I went to the L for the autofocus. Now that the new 35/2 has USM and better MTF, I think I'll switch back and pocket a few bucks.

That's the point of this lens though - an alternative to the Canon/Nikon/Sony/Zeiss lenses at a cost reduction and near equivalent performance. The Canon lens is around $1500. the Nikon is about $1600. The Sony is around $1500. The Zeiss is around $1800. At $900 this lens is very competitive.

Its good to see they are supporting Sony and Pentax mounts too. We need a really healthy, competitive digital imaging sector for the benefit of consumers, lest Canikon get complacent and take the consumer for granted.

Not so sure about Sigma. I bought a 24mm 1.8EX DG back in 2000 for my Canon Elan II. The lens worked great on that and my EOS 3, but when I went digital it didn't work properly on my 20D nor my 5D, or later on my 1DS2. Now that I have a 5D2 the lens seems to work again but all the previous DSLR's the AE didn't work properly.

I sent countless emails to Sigma over the years to get the lens rechipped but they never responded to any of my emails. I think I'll stick with Canon thanks.

Having buildt my own digital devices and many lens systems in some cases making the element groups, do not from the specifications, understand why this lens, a minimalist design composed mostly of plastic should retail for so much money.

A lens with less manual control, more dependent on power and with the removal of the aperture ring, less of a professional tool.

■One “F” Low Dispersion (FLD) glass lens...

All the elements are small in diameter, easy to work, not too hard to polish.

Would love to hear your thoughts on the recently announced Nikon and Canon lenses if you think this one’s surprisingly expensive!

This one has two large-diameter aspherical elements (front and rear), more ED glass elements, and more elements full stop (thirteen) than any 35 mm f/1.4 by Nikon, Canon, or Zeiss – all of which, incidentally, cost much more.

nice breakdown. I would imagine though that no gear manufacturer wants to lower the price threshold that currently exists, regardless of price to build. and honestly, they are priced more in the comfortable zone as opposed to canon, who is acting all kinds of price crazy right now

Economics my friend. You don't base your pricing on manufacturing cost. Its the perceived value placed by consumers who are willing to pay this sort of price and all the camera and lens manufacturers need to maximize their profit margins. They are for profit businesses after all right.

The lens prices coming from Nikon, Canon, … in some cases are abusive. Much of that philosophy I suspect being simple industry exploitation, along with excessive development cost, mixed with the consolidation (loss competition) in the number of glass producers. Compounding the issue is that the glass recipes are highly secretive and dominated by Canon, Nikon being a distant second the Germans a distant third.

Aggravating the situation is that the modern user is generally detached from optics, programmed to be automated, no longer repairing their own lens, not owning a spanner wrench.

The fact that some of the glass elements are low dispersion, and or aspheric surfaces, not too big an issue and with the proper equipment, simple to interferometrically test.

Refractive optics with diameter’s spanning 50-80mm, from the perspective of an optical engineer or manufacturing, is not large. The standard Zygo interferometer being 4 inches in diameter.

Also, a prime lens with fewer elements is more optimal. The increase in element count making the system more of a statistical pancake.

Think of a lens system as an analog audio amplifier, the more parts included, the more inherent noise generated. Think of coatings as capacitance coupling.

The real test of lens quality being under magnification, as done with telescopic and macroscopic systems, or in the days of old, using a photo enlarger. The process of enlarging no longer performed with the integration of digital imagers i.e. CCD, CMOS. Giving many lens makers a modern break in optical quality.

In short, take a small eyepiece, place it behind a camera lens and view the quality of the image (spot diameter). Most camera lens on axis are barely good for 2x per inch of aperture, forget off axis. A good camera lens reaching 10x per inch of aperture.

For an example, my 7 inch f9/6 Apo (1600mm/1070mm), approaches 100x per inch of aperture, and 60x off axis, filling a 35mm frame.

What do you mean by secretive glass recipes? Nikon makes its own glass in its wholly-owned Hikari Glass subsidiary. Canon doesn’t make its own glass (it does make fluorite), but buys it on the open market, much of it from Ohara. I doubt there’s much scope for secrets these days.

As I’m sure you know but didn’t mention, designers of photographic optics face problems that telescope designers never have to bother about, because of the much greater angle of view and much lower f-numbers required by camera lenses. Aberration control in an f/1.4 lens with a 63° angle of view (like this Sigma 35 mm) is horrendously complex compared to a telescope. Those thirteen elements aren’t there for fun!

Telescopes can also have lots of hand-made input, not possible with a mass-produced camera lens retailing for a few hundred dollars. In a mass-production context, aspherical surfaces over 20 mm in diameter are hard (expensive) to form. Grinding is out of the question due to cost. A lot of effort has gone into glass-moulding technologies in the last couple of decades to tackle this problem.

I agree recent lens prices can seem abusive, but I think you underplay the difficulties in making these lenses. What kind of telescope can you make for $900?

Yes, many other camera and lens manufactures are implementing similar complexity reductions. The recent proliferation of digital only view finders, the dismissing of interchangeable prisms, backs, deletion of aperture rings, increased dependence on battery power, all of which reduce the value of the tool, ultimately restricting the end user experience or available function set, much of which motivated by short term profit margins and shareholder returns, I wish not to be case.

Hence, the point you are attempting to make, implying or suggesting that I condone similar design alteration taken by competing manufactures is not valid.

"Canon and Nikon are regarded in some circles as a professional camera, yet the entire lens lineup is devoid of aperture rings"

That's not entirely true. Nikon still sells D lenses, which do have aperture ring. Also, the focus motor is not in those lenses. Their price is also cheaper, e.g. 50/1.4D vs 50/1.4G. That said, the newer G lenses seem to have better IQ because of the optical redesign or just better coatings.

Well, actually the charts suggest it is going to be OK on APS-C, but not only the corners but also sides will be dark and blurry on FF. Or maybe I just got used to m43 where almost every lens is good wide open.

Speaking as someone with experience with fast Sigma primes I would say I'm very hesitant to buy another one. Focusing performance has been very inconsistent. Optical quality has been awesome, but if I can't rely on a lens to get the picture in focus, it's of no use to me.

I'd like to think Sigma has changed with this lens, but I'll wait for others to test it out first.

A usb dock that the lens attaches to so you can update firmware and perform af micro adjustment! Awesome! Screw you Canon looks like I will get micro adjust on my 60d after all....sort of. Hopefully they will be able to make it backwards compatible with some of the older lenses. Better still imagine a hack that lets you micro adjust canon lenses too!

Sounds like great lens for a fair price. I would pick this one over canons new 35f2 IS for about the same price (canon probably comes without a hood etc.). @35mm IS is just a small advantage in my opinion. I would rather have the extra stop of light but to each his own. Good to have different offerings in this price range.

Well if you had a Sony or a Pentax the lack of IS in the lens would not be an issue. Having stabalised wide angle lenses, even fast ones is great for indoor photography such as in museums where flash is not allowed

Desirable!Don't be fooled by the price, though... it is "Art" series... there will probably be pro models which will cost much more!I assume that Art will be in the "low build quality / high performance" sector.

Don't assume, check out Sigma's site. While it may turn out the way you suggest, right now the distinction between the 3 lines of lenses seems to be made by the purpose, not any quality considerations.

I doubt it will be built to L standards, but I doubt many of us need that anyway.

Er... the point of the new C A S designations from Sigma is to get away from "pro" lenses. Art lenses will be focused on special effects - large apertures and macro. Sports lenses will be focused on telephoto performance and focus speed. Contemporary lenses will be the remaining general purpose zooms. Please read the Sigma announcement.

The "Art" lineup is also based on focal lengths used for art and portraiture, most likely always Prime Lenses, 35/50/85/135Sports being fast/ weatherproofed/long focal lengthscontemporary line being all purpose

Art line = focused on best image qualityContemporary line = highest possible optical performance that can be accomplished in a compact size (size seems to be the priority)Sports line = action photography

700,21 euro's is the price of almost al my Gear but who knows in about 5 or 10 years it wil be stil around and is a good lens,.. or its not capeble to resist time as my Minolta lenses, who are stil function very wel.

What a nice looking lens, well done Sigma. I bet it will perform. Very good price for a start. looks promising. The Samyang 35/1.4 set the bar extremely high for me. No colour aberrations to speak of , not quite sticking out regarding the glare (veiling one; going by so far experience it is a hair behind the 24-70 Nikkor in extreme tests and the Nikkor zoom is not fantastic either). But it does deliver in contrast and sharpness including small apertures, it really does incredibly. built very nice.Hynek

Yes, the EX is a semi-pro line.And Sony's 35mm f/1.4 is basically re-branded Minolta which went through few body re-designs, but for all the time used exactly the same optical formula as a lens released in 1987.Yes, it's one of very few lenses that went through such a long lifespan withouth complete redesign of optics, but never the less: that's the reason while it's sub-pair to modern DSLRs (although still it's quite great stopped down).

Well, I was always hoping someone would produce a lens of this spec for APS-C, as an upgrade to the Nikon 35/1.8. However, like the 30/1.4.. it's too big. I'm sure FF users will really enjoy it though. Along those lines, a DX 23mm f1.4 would be rather nice.

Its not so much balance as size and weight. With my D7000 and either the 50/1.4 or 35/1.8 I feel a lot less noticable than with the Sigma 30/1.4 for example. Plus it just about fits into a large coat pocket.

the 30-1.4 rocks on many cameras, but not on all. On mirrorless you get soft corners and sh-tloads of aberration. On NEX-7 it is a fantastic close range lens and portrait hammer. But in landscape situations and counter-light, you struggle hard with blue and cyan fringing. On my Fuji S5 it performs like a dream in just any situation. Could be possible that the A-mount version does better on NEX, but I doubt it.